CORRESPONDENCE - 75D - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PALMIERI TYLER City of Santa Ana June 6, 2017 Page 2 We object to every aspect and component of the proposed resolution to condemn and "any other matter regarding the right to take" as referred to in the proposed resolution to condemn. We object on CEQA growids. The City appears to change the project considered in the EIR. The EIR was not a maintenance yard project. The staff report is inconsistent with the proposed resolution language. We object to adoption of an eminent domain resolution based on the Political Reform Act, common law principles and the City of Santa Ana Code of Ethics and Conduct prohibiting bias and conflicts of interest, For example, the Political Reform Act prohibits/restricts public officials from acting based upon bias and conflicts of interest. According to the Staff Report, which is quite general and vague, the project purports to benefit the City and the entire downtown area in particular. Any council member who knows or has reason to know that they have a financial interest in the area purportedly benefitted by this project must abstain from participating in making or in any way use his official position to influence the malting of a public decision. Due to the scope and nature of the Project, it is believed that Council members do, or are likely to have, financial interests in the making of this decision. A great deal of information concerning the making of this decision has not been provided to SA Recycling and the property owner despite requests being made. Inadequate time has been provided by the City concerning the eminent domain taking. Again, overall there is lack of proper notice to appropriate parties and with regard to scope of the eminent domain taking resolution, • Insufficient and erroneous information provided. • Contradictory statements between staff report and proposed resolution. • Inadequate documents provided, • The few documents actually referenced in staff report were not included as exhibits to the Staff Report. • No notice of the hearing on the "cooperative agreement' or "amendment to the cooperative agreement." • No notice defining project as the OC Streetcar Maintenance and Storage Facility, No CEQA compliance of such "project." Contradictory information concerning the "project." 2101919.1